Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
American 767
Topic Author
Posts: 4555
Joined: Wed May 19, 1999 7:27 am

New Zealand Aviation Thread 153

Tue Feb 03, 2015 1:27 am

Feel like eating a kiwi? Please continue the discussion here.

New Zealand Aviation Thread 152 (by 777ER Jan 21 2015 in Civil Aviation)

Best,
Ben Soriano
Ben Soriano
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19473
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 153

Tue Feb 03, 2015 1:43 am

From the previous thread:

Quoting gasman (Reply 201):
The term "all weather airport" even if it has been used in the mainstream media, has no place on an aviation enthusiasts' website. As does not the term "jumbo".

Sorry to give you the bad news, but I first encountered the term here, many years ago, by posters I respect, and have seen it used - here - many, many times since.

Quoting gasman (Reply 201):
Whatever you are actually likely to mean by the term "all weather airport", it won't happen at Whangarei

Nor do I expect it to, at WRE - as I've already said. I can't predict the future so I have no idea what will happen at the new airport, but how sad if it starts with your compromises rather than dreams of excellence.

mariner

[Edited 2015-02-02 18:08:22]
aeternum nauta
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19473
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 153

Tue Feb 03, 2015 2:29 am

And on a completely different matter, Virgin it;'s giving up its NZ AOC:

http://australianaviation.com.au/201...uish-nz-air-operators-certificate/

"Virgin Australia to relinquish NZ air operator’s certificate"

It doesn't really change anything but it's quite an interesting read.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
User avatar
zkojq
Posts: 4573
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2011 12:42 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 153

Tue Feb 03, 2015 6:52 am

On a much lighter note from Auckland's transportation planning/funding woes, here is ZK-OXG:

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7371/16223226397_a7156e39a3_c.jpgAirbus A320-232WL Air New Zealand - cn 6460 F-WWDZ -> ZK-OXG by Jujug Spotting, on Flickr

Quote:
It amuses me when Aucklanders sneer at the planned extensions to the northern motorway as "the holiday highway

I've always thought that it was the non-Aucklanders that disapproved of it.

Quote:
I think it is the rest of the country South of the Bombays that call it this because it doesn't benefit them.

  

Quote:
I also contacted one of the larger dismantlers and they said they could help also. You wouldn't really have much chance with aircraft (like the 747-400) that are still in active service as the price for these would be prohibitively high.

Thanks. Yeah I thought that 747-400 bits would be a tall order. As it happens, Air New Zealand was running a competition a while back to win parts (compressor blades it looked like) from one of SUH's GE CF6s.

Quote:
I suspect that one day the pendulum will swing back - that airlines, even NZ will recognise that investments in product quality can provide returns in ways that can't always be directly measured.

Lets hope so.

Quote:
The main reason for this has been the extraordinary success of the Northern Busway and the staggering growth on the Northern Express bus service, which is viewed as Auckland's fourth "rail line".

Literally the city's only bit of foresightful infrastructure planning in the last decade....and it cost less than half a billion $$! I would suggest the Waterview Connection, but that and the Western Ring Route should have been completed fifteen years ago.

Quote:
I still think it's silly that - within the national infrastructure - there's no A320 capable airport north of the harbour bridge.

Agreed, or at least one capable of taking some larger Business jets, such as a GLEX.

Quote:
The problem is that both Dairy Flat and Kumeu (next door to Whenuapai) are within the urban part of the Rural Urban Boundary, slated for more residential development

The problem for both is that they are close to very affluent areas such as Coatesville, whose wealthy residents will fight tooth and nail to ensure that the airport is never allowed to become a commercial operation. And of course, the approach to RW21 at Whenuapai goes right over ECB, which won't win it much support.

Quote:
If there is ever to be a northern airport, and it's a huge "if," I think it should be back to the drawing board.

I've often thought that a newbuild airport should be located close to the Kaipara Harbour as possible, maybe North West of Kaukapakapa. That was the approach would be over the harbour, minimising noise disturbance (and therefore political opposition). Then you just need to upgrade 10-15 km worth of road which connects to Orewa/Silverdale. As a bonus, there's also a rail line close by...I even saw a train on it last week.   

Quote:
it's more the issue of proximity for North Shore (and other..) residents to AKL rather than a general need for a second airport in the whole of Auckland's area.

  

Quote:
I wonder what would be cheaper. A brand new airport north of Auckland or a higher speed rail link from the North of Auckland to AKL.
Quote:
The recent announcement by Auckland Transport that it is considering light rail (in the surprisingly near future) gives glimpses of a future where the Northern Busway may become a light rail corridor

Not enough space for rail IMO, unless you put it all underground....which is extra expensive. As ever, you have to ask where the money will come from. The council is broke.

Quote:
Have they gotten rid of the power / telephone wires at the threshold of 03 - no markers on them

They actually have.

Quote:
Sometimes LAN deploys the A340s on short-haul while their on the ground at SCL to destinations i.e. EZE and LIM. They even recently deployed it on the SCL-IPC-PPT route.

I'd love to fly that route in an A340.     

Quoting mariner (Reply 2):
And on a completely different matter, Virgin it;'s giving up its NZ AOC:

I asked on another thread if the ex-VAANZ aircraft will still be operating the Tasman/Pacific routes with Kiwi crews or if they will operate interchangeably with other Virgin Australia aircraft. Unfortunately noone there knew. Any insights from people reading this thread? Once the aircraft have been transferred to the Australian register, JetConnect will be the biggest 737 operator in NZ, followed by Airwork.

[Edited 2015-02-02 23:04:02]
First to fly the 787-9
 
User avatar
Kiwirob
Posts: 13406
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 153

Tue Feb 03, 2015 7:58 am

Quote:
New Zealand needs a set of highspeed 140kph+ tollroads that trucks are banned on that cutstraight through the country,through hillsides/taniwhas and over viaducts in mind for NZ instead of flying. Frankfurt-Paris, Barcelona-Toulouse, Perpignan-Geneva, are all in the 400-600km range, yet I can drive them in substantially less time than the equivalent distance would here. Add in a highspeed freeway along SH1 and heck I could be in Wellington in 5h instead of somewhere plus or minus PMR. This is the kind of thing NZ needs, not airports.
Even in USA with 70mph speed limits driving long distance is no issue because they just cut through the landscape rather than drive around it and the roads are all wide/flat enough to drive at a consistant speed. Less mess, less distance, more untouched wilderness. It's a win win. It just involves a bit of investment instead of choosing the cheapest possible option all the time without any foresight for how NZ will be in 50-100 years rather than the usual 5-10 years

Are you crazy, the cost of doing this would be enormus, the environmental damage would be huge and we simply don't have the population to support roading on a grand scale like this.
 
User avatar
aerorobnz
Posts: 8424
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2001 3:43 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 153

Tue Feb 03, 2015 9:17 am

Quoting ZKOJQ (Reply 3):
Unfortunately noone there knew.

I do, but sadly that is something that is commercially sensitive so I can't say here. What I can say is they are being standardised interiorwise with VAA. The first aircraft is not far away. from service entry.

Quoting Kiwirob (Reply 4):
Are you crazy, the cost of doing this would be enormus, the environmental damage would be huge and we simply don't have the population to support roading on a grand scale like this.

Like I have said before. New Zealand needs to work on becoming a bit more first world, it needs to actively pursue attracting people to live here and building a population base and it needs to plan for a future with more people,. No more half assed tight kiwi roads that have to be resealed widened every 18 months. because they have chosen the absolute most budget short term option.
Flown to 147 Airports in 62 Countries on 83 Operators and counting. Wanderlust is like Syphilis, once you have the itch it's too late for treatment.
 
ZKSUJ
Posts: 6885
Joined: Tue May 18, 2004 5:15 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 153

Tue Feb 03, 2015 9:53 am

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 5):
New Zealand needs to work on becoming a bit more first world, it needs to actively pursue attracting people to live here and building a population base and it needs to plan for a future with more people,. No more half assed tight kiwi roads that have to be resealed widened every 18 months. because they have chosen the absolute most budget short term option.

Reactive rather than proactive, sums up NZ infrastructure in many respects. AKL being a good example
 
User avatar
Kiwirob
Posts: 13406
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 153

Tue Feb 03, 2015 10:10 am

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 5):
Like I have said before. New Zealand needs to work on becoming a bit more first world, it needs to actively pursue attracting people to live here and building a population base and it needs to plan for a future with more people,. No more half assed tight kiwi roads that have to be resealed widened every 18 months. because they have chosen the absolute most budget short term option.

Even countries with virtually unlimited budgets compared to New Zealand, Norway being my example, have far worse roads than we have. It gets even worse when you compare hospitals and schools, NZ does very well IMO.
 
User avatar
zkojq
Posts: 4573
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2011 12:42 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 153

Tue Feb 03, 2015 12:16 pm

ZK-MVA has changed its livery, from the 'All Blacks' scheme to the 'ZK-NZE' scheme. A step backwards, IMO.
http://mrcaviation.blogspot.co.nz/20...mva-changes-its-tail-feathers.html

When the new/current livery was announced, it was mentioned that a few aircraft would be painted in the black 'ZK-NZE' scheme....

Quote:
Air New Zealand is putting the silver fern on its aircraft on an all black or black and white colour scheme.


The majority of the airline's fleet will eventually feature the white version of the new livery and a limited number will feature the distinctive black version of the new design, including the first Boeing 787-9 Dreamliner, due for delivery next year.

....but so far ZK-NZE and ZK-MVA are the only aircraft to wear it. Can we expect any new deliveries of A320s, ATRs or 787s to wear the dark livery? Presumably all the other aircraft in the 'All Blacks' scheme will eventually be repainted in the 'ZK-NZE' scheme once the NZRU agreement expires in September? If nothing else, it will save paint.

Amazing to think that, as of a week ago, ZK-OAB is already four years old.

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 5):
I do, but sadly that is something that is commercially sensitive so I can't say here.

Fair enough. I certainly wouldn't want anyone here to divulge things that they aren't supposed to.

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 5):
What I can say is they are being standardised interiorwise with VAA.

Finally!

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 5):
The first aircraft is not far away. from service entry.

Services begins on either Feb 20th or Feb 28th, from memory.

Quoting ZKSUJ (Reply 6):
Reactive rather than proactive, sums up NZ infrastructure in many respects

Yup!

[Edited 2015-02-03 04:26:22]
First to fly the 787-9
 
User avatar
aerorobnz
Posts: 8424
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2001 3:43 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 153

Tue Feb 03, 2015 8:44 pm

Quoting ZKOJQ (Reply 8):
Amazing to think that, as of a week ago, ZK-OAB is already four years old.

It feels older than that. I already flew OAB and OJR 7x each in that time.
Flown to 147 Airports in 62 Countries on 83 Operators and counting. Wanderlust is like Syphilis, once you have the itch it's too late for treatment.
 
777ER
Head Moderator
Posts: 10134
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 153

Wed Feb 04, 2015 6:21 pm

Was on UA99 yesterday to LAX. Y was around 60% full, so got a set of 3 seats to myself which enabled a good stretch and sleep. Very impressed with the service received on board. Found the drinks service was perfect for a 14 hour flight.

Lunch served was filling but found the hot breakfast (omelette) option to be shocking. Would hate to see what the cold option serving size was! A light snack was served 5 hours after lunch which was at a perfect time since not many were sleeping considering the windows were all locked at dark.

TBIT was an excellent first time experience. Customs was VERY quick. UA99 parked at the gate beside the main taxiway so was a long walk. Would be very happy to use UA again to LAX, infact UA might now be my main Star Alliance choice to the USA instead of NZ. The 3-3-3 seating was far superior and didn't feel crowded
Head Forum Moderator
[email protected]
Flown: 1900D,S340,Q300,AT72-5/6,DC3,CR2/7,E145,E70/75/90,A319/20/21,A332/3,A359,A380,F100,B717,B733/4/8/9,B742/4,B752/3,B763,B772/3, B789
With: NZ,SJ,QF,JQ,EK,VA,AA,UA,DL,FL,AC,FJ,SQ,TG,PR
 
Gasman
Posts: 2203
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 153

Wed Feb 04, 2015 9:40 pm

Quoting 777ER (Reply 10):

Glad you enjoyed your trip! Yes, I have resolved to making one of the several "Australian" options my choice to the USA from now on. I'm sick of paying more for less with NZ.

Another superficial media article today.......... where was the sentence saying "NZs 777 product is now amongst the most cramped in the sky........"??

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/travel/new...ticle.cfm?c_id=7&objectid=11395258

[Edited 2015-02-04 13:51:00]
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 1821
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 153

Wed Feb 04, 2015 11:48 pm

Quoting gasman (Reply 11):
Another superficial media article today.......... where was the sentence saying "NZs 777 product is now amongst the most cramped in the sky........"??

First, it's not superficial, it's just one person's personal experience of a long-haul flight on NZ's 77W. It doesn't try to be objective, it's opinion.

I know it rankles that the writer actually didn't have anything much to complain about, but I think it proves the point that if NZ can fill its flights (and this one was full) providing the level of service that they do and charging the fares that they charge, why would they do anything different? Those who don't like it presumably have already walked to the opposition and are not on the plane anyway, so what's the problem?

Those who criticise the carrier are in effect saying that that it has an obligation to meet the specific needs of a very defined market sector who want certain standards. With the greatest respect, that's a very self-focused, self-interested argument. If you look at the carrier's results, the market as a whole seems to appreciate the carrier's offering and price.

As with all other aspects of airline management, A-netters are far more skilled at making decisions on the price-quality mix offered by the airline than the airline's own executives. If only NZ took the advice that's offered on these threads, their profits would surely be in the billions. I just don't understand why management is so incompetent and fails to appreciate the management skills on offer on A-net!
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
Gasman
Posts: 2203
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 153

Thu Feb 05, 2015 12:23 am

Quoting DavidByrne (Reply 12):

I don't disagree with you, except I think you miss one point. NZ enjoy a monoploy on many of their routes. So saying 'those who don't like it don't have to fly with them' is trite. Kind of like the prison cook telling the convicts if they don't like the food they can go elsewhere. I'm usually the biggest advocate of letting the free market determine the price & product etc; but where the market isn't big enough to sustain at least a duoploy; the situation becomes overwhelmingly biased in favour of the provider.

That's why I wish the media would take NZ to task a bit more, because the market doesn't provide the degree of refereeing it otherwise would if NZ had more competition. NZ have downgraded their product and continued to charge high prices because they can. And the only reason they can is because they enjoy a degree of monoploy status.

Quoting DavidByrne (Reply 12):
If only NZ took the advice that's offered on these threads, their profits would surely be in the billions. I just don't understand why management is so incompetent and fails to appreciate the management skills on offer on A-net!

Your sarcasm is wasted on me. If we accept that management are evaluated on the basis of the profit margin, then NZs management are extremely good indeed. But I'm not a shareholder in NZ (if we ignore the government shareholding) so I would wish their profit to be $1.95 a year, after tax. If it's higher, that means I've paid too much. Company profit and service delivery are to an extent mutually exclusive. You can't have it both ways
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19473
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 153

Thu Feb 05, 2015 1:41 am

Quoting gasman (Reply 13):
But I'm not a shareholder in NZ (if we ignore the government shareholding) so I would wish their profit to be $1.95 a year, after tax.

I wonder how they'd pay for things like new aircraft then.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
User avatar
zkojq
Posts: 4573
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2011 12:42 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 153

Thu Feb 05, 2015 1:44 am

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 9):
I already flew OAB and OJR 7x each in that time.

Only twice on OAB for me.  
Quoting gasman (Reply 11):
Another superficial media article today.......... where was the sentence saying "NZs 777 product is now amongst the most cramped in the sky........"??

Explained by the very last sentence:

Quote:
The writer travelled courtesy of Air New Zealand.

  

Quoting DavidByrne (Reply 12):
why would they do anything different?

Long term value in the loyalty from customers who won't immediately jump ship once Air New Zealand's monopoly on the route runs out.
First to fly the 787-9
 
Gasman
Posts: 2203
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 153

Thu Feb 05, 2015 2:02 am

Quoting mariner (Reply 14):
Quoting gasman (Reply 13):
But I'm not a shareholder in NZ (if we ignore the government shareholding) so I would wish their profit to be $1.95 a year, after tax.

I wonder how they'd pay for things like new aircraft then.

mariner

Profit statements generally account for planned capital expenditure.

Quoting zkojq (Reply 15):
Explained by the very last sentence:

Quote:
The writer travelled courtesy of Air New Zealand.

Can't believe I missed that. So NZ received an unbelievably cheap newspaper advert.
 
keen2fly
Posts: 173
Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2010 2:10 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 153

Thu Feb 05, 2015 2:56 am

Quoting gasman (Reply 16):
Quote:
The writer travelled courtesy of Air New Zealand.

Can't believe I missed that. So NZ received an unbelievably cheap newspaper advert.

Indeed, I remember when Hawaiian Airlines rebooked a journalist during the NZ10 debacle in HNL last year, his article turned into a comparison of the two airlines and he of course criticised everything about NZ and suddenly HA was the worlds best airline. The most laughable part was when he described NZ's PTV's as clunky and old but apparently HA's were amazing and new (despite being a similar panasonic model), and also having to pay for movies was fine because HA were really so darn awesome. The journalists who have their tickets paid for then write a 'review' gushing about the airline really shouldn't be allowed to call themselves journalists...
 
axio
Posts: 271
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2006 10:44 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 153

Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:00 am

Quoting gasman (Reply 16):
So NZ received an unbelievably cheap newspaper advert.

You have to say NZ marketing does ensure the airline is very prominent, although I'm not sure they don't overstep sometimes...

I went to the 75 Years Exhibit at Te Papa and I was a little disappointed because to me it felt like a booth at a conference rather than an exhibition at a museum. Things like 'see how Air NZ helps X deliver Y' felt really marketing heavy and not that appropriate for a museum. I did appreciate the interactive stuff, and being able to feel how the old passengers might have felt was nice, but overall it just felt light on information and historical narrative. Also $99 for the plane models... really!?!
Time for a new viewing deck at AKL!
 
Kaiarahi
Posts: 1810
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 6:55 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 153

Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:22 am

I miss Koruman.

When I first moved to Canada, with young kids, I could only afford Y. Which I flew with NZ because the hard / soft product was superior. That built my loyalty for 30 years.

Now I travel Y+ with family, J on business, but I go out of my way to avoid NZ:

1) The total rip-off on connecting flights in N. America. CNX on a Y+ ticket are booked by NZ in the cheapest Y fare bucket, with all the disadvantages that brings. I can usually do 2 separate tickets for a lower cost without enduring the disadvantages.

2) I flew on one of the earliest 77W flights from AKL-LAX in Y+ (Space Seat). 6 of us (frequent flyers, not family) spent time in LAX composing an e-mail to NZ setting out what didn't work (before rows were removed). We received total bullshit PR responses.

3) FF (Star) mileage accumulation. NZ booked tickets suck.

Upshot - I now travel AC to SYD, with whatever works for the connection. Revenue loss to NZ - about $50K per year. Given what 777ER has posted, I may try UA next time. But NZ has lost me (and family).
Empty vessels make the most noise.
 
Gemuser
Posts: 5117
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 12:07 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 153

Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:25 am

Quoting axio (Reply 18):
Also $99 for the plane models... really!?!

I got the Solent 4 and thought it was worth every cent! These are professional models, not consumer ones. It looks absolutely fabulous in my display case, makes the Amtrak Genesis Loco look unimpressive by comparison.

But I agree with your other comments.

Gemuser
DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19473
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 153

Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:28 am

Quoting gasman (Reply 16):
Profit statements generally account for planned capital expenditure.


Ah - so you mean a fully net profit number, with everything already accounted for, such as Capex and shareholder dividends.

Hope so, because strong profits and attendant dividends help boost the share price and without that the market cap would drop, making (financial) life that much more difficult for the airline.

As a free marketeer, I've always believed (and have seen) that all good things flow from profit, but each to their own, always.

Maybe you were exaggerating to make a point - your present disenchantment with Air NZ.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
Nouflyer
Posts: 315
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2014 9:38 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 153

Thu Feb 05, 2015 9:31 am

There seems to be a really sophisticated discussion going on here about Air New Zealand, one which is long overdue.

Mariner makes the point which the current set-up of big business propounds: short-term profits are good, so rejoice.

Several of the rest of you - notably Kaiarahi - are urging caution. You are arguing that:

1) the profits appear to be largely due to anti-competitive behaviour (monopolies and duopolies)
2) Air NZ is actually retreating from markets where it has to compete, even against carriers such as Emirates which often offer 2-stop services and burn 10-20% more fuel.
3) Air NZ has turned its back on the previous niche it had as a blue chip carrier, which commanded higher-than-average fares but offered a superior product (notably 34 inches long-haul economy legroom).

I am not sure that any metric exists to measure whether Air NZ's market repositioning is prudent or foolish.

We have already seen Seats To Suit feted as a triumph, when in fact it started to be profitable only when Virgin was converted from a competitor to a duopoly partner. And much as Mariner likes Works Deluxe, I've only just completed a survey for the airline in which they make it clear that it is to be axed. Perhaps more relevantly, Virgin has moved away from Air NZ's narrowbody model to actually add Business Class to its shorthaul international fleet.

I suspect that Air NZ's long-haul transformation has been an error, but one that is obscured by the profits derived from the monopoly situation, especially between Auckland and the US mainland.

I cannot help noticing when I fly Virgin Australia how the Economy legroom diminishes the further back you go.

I suspect that long-haul Air NZ should simply have segmented Economy as follows:

Y class, B class: Spaceseats, 34 inch pitch. Full service.
M class, H class, 34 inch pitch. Full service.
Q, W, V, T class. 32 inch pitch. Full service.
L, S, G, K class. 32 inch pitch. Buy on Board.

The same would apply to short-haul, which I would model like Virgin Australia does:

2 rows of Business Class.
Y, B, M, H class - Space Plus 34 inches, Full Service.
All lower classes - 31 inch legroom, Buy on Board.

I think that these models would be simpler to apply than the current mess, but would also ensure that quality persists in Economy class.

Kaiarahi and Koruman's points about how they acquired their brand loyalty are really important. I find it fascinating that airlines seem to do little but cut the benefits for their most loyal customers while hotel chains generally increase them.

And Honolulu provides warning of a potential major problem for Air NZ across its long-haul network. It is a market that has boomed in recent years from both Australia and New Zealand. Air NZ did what they always try to do nowadays: they (ab)used their monopoly position to keep fares absurdly high and seat supply low.

But as soon as Hawaiian entered the market that ceased to be an option. Return fares in Business Class have since fallen by 40%, not because of cut-throat competition or predatory pricing but because of simple competition.

The entire long-haul business model now is based upon a monopoly position. Goodness knows how the airline will respond if that is lost, but the blue chip market niche is long-gone.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19473
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 153

Thu Feb 05, 2015 10:12 am

Quoting Nouflyer (Reply 22):
Mariner makes the point which the current set-up of big business propounds: short-term profits are good, so rejoice.

Please don't put words in my mouth.

I don't usually use the qualifier "short-term" in connection with profits and since Air NZ has been profitable for a number of years "short-term" scarcely applies.

mariner

[Edited 2015-02-05 02:27:01]
aeternum nauta
 
User avatar
NZ107
Posts: 4946
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 6:51 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 153

Thu Feb 05, 2015 10:43 am

Quoting Nouflyer (Reply 22):

Well written. All I'm waiting for now is AA to start AKL-LAX. Any sort of competition would be welcomed by the NZ consumer. NZ is nearly 3x daily without competition. The demand is definitely there, no doubt about that.

Seats to suit has been interesting. The only reason they introduced Works Deluxe was to keep those in WLG and CHC "happy" when they removed J from the A320s. The A321s will hopefully have J in it.. And it makes me wonder if they'll consider reinstating J in at least some of the A320s. I'm not counting on it but I feel it could be an option.

I actually enjoy the AA/UA approach to Economy in the 777. They have a front section of Economy which has more legroom and is for the elite FFs and anyone who wants to pay for it. For UA's 772, it means 34" rather than 31". On AA's 77W and retrofitted 772, it means 36" and 9-abreast vs 31" and 10-abreast. It sounds like an easier way than the one described above to segregate passengers.

NZ's strategy to tie most markets with competition up has surprisingly succeeded. HKG is shared with CX. SIN is shared with SQ. Monopolies to YVR, SFO, LAX, NRT.. The only long haul route (HNL is medium-haul) that I can think of ex-AKL right now which has actual competition is PVG, with MU starting this summer. And, well, it's not really like PVG was ever high yielding.

With more 787s (and A350s) coming onboard, I really hope airlines consider flying to AKL. JL, AA, UA, QR to name a few.

A lot of cost cutting has taken place to get to their profit position. And this is only helped by the oil price. They'll need to find other ways to start making money once these times are over. And maybe direct competition on major routes would actually be good for the airline - actually force them to innovate further and differentiate themselves in a positive way to stay ahead of the game.
It's all about the destination AND the journey.
 
User avatar
Kiwirob
Posts: 13406
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 153

Thu Feb 05, 2015 11:30 am

Quoting ZKOJQ (Reply 3):
I've always thought that it was the non-Aucklanders that disapproved of it.

I approve of it, I was an Aucklander once upon a time. I don't really know anyone who thinks it's a bad idea. Any new multilane road is a good idea in my books.

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 19):
I miss Koruman.

Start following Nouflyer he's remarkably similar.

Quoting Nouflyer (Reply 22):
I find it fascinating that airlines seem to do little but cut the benefits for their most loyal customers while hotel chains generally increase them.

No they do not, Carlsson, Hilton, Starwood all devalued their loyalty programs last year.
 
Nouflyer
Posts: 315
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2014 9:38 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 153

Thu Feb 05, 2015 11:41 am

Quoting Kiwirob (Reply 25):
No they do not, Carlsson, Hilton, Starwood all devalued their loyalty programs last year.

Only for lower yielding guests.

If you take the example of Starwood, their equivalent of higher-tier frequent flyers now earn higher tier bonuses on their stays but also get 10 advance-confirmable suite upgrades per year in addition to the existing on-checkin ones.

Airpoints has two extraordinary characteristics for higher-tier frequent flyers.

The first is that they enjoy no tier bonus on their earning.

The second is that it identifies itself as a program which rewards spending, not distance travelled, yet not only have redemption prices gone up inexorably but bizarrely earning rates have been savaged, especially on higher fares.

I'm all for loyalty programs devaluing benefits for less loyal customers.

But when you start to devalue benefits for the most loyal and highest-yielding customers, you are starting to forget what a loyalty program's purpose is - to drive loyalty.
 
Gasman
Posts: 2203
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 153

Thu Feb 05, 2015 7:49 pm

Quoting Nouflyer (Reply 22):
The entire long-haul business model now is based upon a monopoly position. Goodness knows how the airline will respond if that is lost, but the blue chip market niche is long-gone.

A market which I once acknowledged, respected, and was happy to pay slightly more for.

As you say, there exists no metric to reliably determine whether NZ's market realignment has been a good thing for the airline or not. I suspect not. But be that as it may, what I find particularly problematic is that the value for money equation has gone south also. Product quality has reduced dramatically, yet the "blue chip" fares most definitely still exist. And they continue to exist because of the monopolistic route structure.

So as I see it NZ are exploiting a monopoly and overcharging for a sub-par product. Nothing illegal about that, and if the competition/consumer backlash that I yearn for never occurs, it may even never hurt them on the balance sheet. But as a once very loyal customer it's disappointing, and leaves a bad taste.
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 153

Thu Feb 05, 2015 8:11 pm

Quoting Nouflyer (Reply 22):
The entire long-haul business model now is based upon a monopoly position. Goodness knows how the airline will respond if that is lost, but the blue chip market niche is long-gone.

I doubt if there is any potential competitive carrier on the AKL- USA market that will offer anything better than NZ offers . All they are most likely to introduce are some fairly healthy seat sales. I wonder how NZ is doing against SQ on the AKL-SIN route. An SQ A380 with their reputed high service levels and a NZ 77E with their present service levels.?
 
ZKSUJ
Posts: 6885
Joined: Tue May 18, 2004 5:15 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 153

Thu Feb 05, 2015 8:40 pm

Quoting Nouflyer (Reply 22):
Quoting NZ107 (Reply 24):

Nicely put guys
 
Gasman
Posts: 2203
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 153

Thu Feb 05, 2015 9:10 pm

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 28):
I doubt if there is any potential competitive carrier on the AKL- USA market that will offer anything better than NZ offers

UA & AA would offer seamless connections, a more generous rewards program and also a more comfortable Y product.
QF would also offer a more comfortable Y product - a 744, A380 or A332 are all better than 10 abreast in a 777 - and arguably a bit more professionalism in the service delivery. I'm told EK have also evaluated AKL-LAX - that would be a massive game changer if it ever occurred.
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 1821
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 153

Thu Feb 05, 2015 11:00 pm

What we're really talking about here is the "value proposition" that NZ has chosen, which is to provide arguably inferior levels of quality and service compared with some of its competitors, and to charge higher fares than some of its competitors. That the proposition yields a decent profit (and has done so for a good number of years) to me says that the carrier has pretty much got it right.

I'm not unsympathetic to those who yearn for a different value proposition, and I'd suggest that the "nimble" carrier will always be prepared to change the value proposition should market forces dictate - all is not lost for those who yearn for change. If we look, however, at the longer-term trends world-wide, the "average" value proposition is definitely shifting toward the lower-quality, lower levels of service, lower fares corner, rather than in the opposite direction. I'd suggest that this has to do with the "democratisation" of air transport as much as anything else. That's not to say that there will not be a place for higher levels of service (in fact, the "hybrid" carrier that NZ has become may well the the way of the future).

Other have noted that NZ benefits from "anti-competitive behaviour" on its monopoly routes. I challenge that - you cannot blame NZ for being "anti-competitive" because the other carriers which have historically served most of these routes have progressively pulled out over the decades. I'd hypothesise that the reason why these routes are now monopolies is precisely because NZ's value proposition is compelling, and that providing a point of difference through a higher quality offering faces a difficult ride.

I'd suggest, therefore, that the more likely change in NZ's value proposition, faced with competition on some of these key routes, could be to trim costs further, and maintain the same kinds of offering at a more competitive price.

It's also clear that NZ cannot compete (and it has stated so itself) with carriers such as the ME3). It's self-evident that it will struggle on routes such as SIN and HKG unless it can offer beyond flights and use them as hubs - the markets to SIN and HKG alone are relatively small compared with the capacity offered. The problem for NZ is that the best carriers to team up with for onward connections are their otherwise direct competitors on the routes between those hubs and AKL. The carrier is caught between a rock and a hard place, therefore, if it ever wants to serve places like SIN or HKG - team up with your direct competitor and remove competition, or don't include those ports on your route map.
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
Kaiarahi
Posts: 1810
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 6:55 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 153

Thu Feb 05, 2015 11:29 pm

Quoting DavidByrne (Reply 31):

I don't dispute anything you say. However, the chosen value proposition does not align with my requirements, so I will use other carriers who better suit what I want. As I mentioned, that's $50K annually going elsewhere. The return on the value proposition will be partly determined by how many others do the same.

For me, the decision to look elsewhere was particularly poignant. In addition to the reasons for loyalty in my earlier post, my father was an FE on NZ DC6s, Electras and DC8s, and my first ever flight at the age of 5 was on a Solent on the Coral Route.
Empty vessels make the most noise.
 
zkncj
Posts: 4165
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 153

Fri Feb 06, 2015 12:16 am

Anyone know what the plans are with the viewing deck at AKL? Seems to be closed for building the new NZ Lounge, anyone know if they plan to re-open it?
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 1821
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 153

Fri Feb 06, 2015 12:33 am

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 32):
However, the chosen value proposition does not align with my requirements, so I will use other carriers who better suit what I want. As I mentioned, that's $50K annually going elsewhere.

Yes, and clearly there are many others who have taken the same approach. Not enough others (yet?), however, to force a rethink of the value proposition.
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
Gasman
Posts: 2203
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 153

Fri Feb 06, 2015 12:39 am

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 32):

I don't dispute anything you say. However, the chosen value proposition does not align with my requirements, so I will use other carriers who better suit what I want. As I mentioned, that's $50K annually going elsewhere. The return on the value proposition will be partly determined by how many others do the same.

Yes, I think David's analysis is spot on, but I don't like it. For me the lost revenue to NZ is around 30K pa., now that I have decided NZ and I are *divorced*.

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 32):
For me, the decision to look elsewhere was particularly poignant. In addition to the reasons for loyalty in my earlier post, my father was an FE on NZ DC6s, Electras and DC8s,

It was a tough call for me too. NZ attained my loyalty as a kid - and they did it with little touches like free gifts, good meals inflight, and the (initially) gorgeous 8 abreast Y cabin on the DC-10. Continuation of that loyalty was a no brainer as a traveling adult, and it even survived the first decade of this century's product downgrades and reshuffles. It's well and truly gone now though; for all the reasons we've been discussing here.
 
User avatar
NZ107
Posts: 4946
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 6:51 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 153

Fri Feb 06, 2015 2:38 am

Quoting zkncj (Reply 33):
Seems to be closed for building the new NZ Lounge, anyone know if they plan to re-open it?

Is there a sign saying so? As the observation deck is around the back of the EK lounge in terms of the current airside walkways, I don't know how they can access it. It better not be the end of the landside observation deck. But if NZ did make use of that space, an open air deck would be welcome....
It's all about the destination AND the journey.
 
zkncj
Posts: 4165
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 153

Fri Feb 06, 2015 3:24 am

Quoting NZ107 (Reply 38):
Is there a sign saying so? As the observation deck is around the back of the EK lounge in terms of the current airside walkways, I don't know how they can access it. It better not be the end of the landside observation deck. But if NZ did make use of that space, an open air deck would be welcome....

The viewing deck is closed off, and there is massive building work that you can see from the car park around that area. The new Lounge is meant to be on the floor above we're the current lounges are.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19473
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 153

Fri Feb 06, 2015 3:29 am

Quoting DavidByrne (Reply 31):
Other have noted that NZ benefits from "anti-competitive behaviour" on its monopoly routes. I challenge that - you cannot blame NZ for being "anti-competitive" because the other carriers which have historically served most of these routes have progressively pulled out over the decades.

  

I'm not buying into this debate because I believe that it is a function of free-market airliens to make money, and because little else of it affects me - I don't partake in any loyalty program and I don't really care who I fly with as long as it gets me there fairly pleasantly and reasonably efficiently.

I just popped in to add a big tick to your comments about "monopoly routes."

However - I do recall the ferocious dumping on Mr. Fyfe that used to happen here regularly, especially by Koruman and largely without dissent, and I wonder if this is now transferring to Mr. Luxon. I do recall that he was dismissed here as "the soap salesman" as soon as he got the job.

The airline version of the Tall Poppy Syndrome, which caused so much outraged comment in the media a couple of weeks ago?

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
Gasman
Posts: 2203
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 153

Fri Feb 06, 2015 3:35 am

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 37):
(initially) gorgeous 8 abreast Y cabin on the DC-10

That was awesome too. We flew it when I first moved to Canada (I didn't think I was moving, but here I am 39 years later).

Indeed!

https://www.airliners.net/photo/Weste...onnell-Douglas-DC-10-10/1778578/L/

(turning a blind eye to the colour scheme for a moment). Also, don't the lack of centre overhead bins give the cabin a lovely airy feel! Those were the days when "cabin baggage" meant a small handbag.

A 77W is just 11" wider than a DC-10. In that 11", NZ (and others) have found "room" for another two seats. Hmmm.

[Edited 2015-02-05 19:38:51]

[Edited 2015-02-05 20:11:00]

[Edited 2015-02-05 20:30:23]

[Edited 2015-02-05 20:32:34]
 
ZKOJH
Posts: 1504
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 9:51 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 153

Fri Feb 06, 2015 4:24 am

China Southern NS15 New Zealand Frequency Changes - WOW this must be doing very good for them! how long till they start CHC?


eff 01AUG15 Guangzhou – Auckland Increase from 10 to 14 weekly

CZ305 CAN0030 – 1600AKL 787 D
CZ335 CAN1430 – 0600+1AKL 787 D

CZ336 AKL0900 – 1700CAN 787 D
CZ306 AKL2200 – 0600+1CAN 787 D

http://airlineroute.net/2015/02/05/cz-oceania-s15/

and just the other day NZ have brought the 787 forward on the PVG route too.

Air New Zealand is moving forward planned daily Boeing 787-9 operations on Auckland – Shanghai Pu Dong route, based on latest schedule update. From 24AUG15, the 787-9 will operate this route on daily basis,

http://airlineroute.net/2015/02/03/nz-pvg-aug15/
Air New Zealand ~ dreams of flying
 
User avatar
aerorobnz
Posts: 8424
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2001 3:43 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 153

Fri Feb 06, 2015 4:50 am

Quoting gasman (Reply 39):
NZ (and others) have found "room" for another two seats. Hmmm.

Potentially including UA on their 772 (and in future 77W), It will be the industry standard by the 777X. Dreadful as it is - it's time to upgrade to another fare (which is probably the idea - make the passengers all miserable enough they feel they have to pay more in order just to be comfortable,).

Make no mistake I have flown 89/180 flights in past 2 years on NZ and subsidiaries , they still get more business than they should really , but I have used NH/TG/UA/ET/TK/SQ/LA/QR/QF/EK /and others and paid way more to do so in order to minimise my longhaul flying on NZ. My longhaul flights on NZ have been at best underwhelming and at worst unpleasant in that time, and my continued exposure to other airlines has whet my appetite for a higher level of service in my Y class (and U and C).

I have had the following experiences in the last few years mid/longhaul

- ignored by FSM when they were doing "*Gold" cabin introductions
- had last meal option in Y+ (badly managed- they came to ask me as a *Gold first but failed to deliver
- on HNL I had to request they activate my IFE because my WKS product (despite correctly reflected on manifest) was not set up
- No waterservice overnight on multiple flights and been forced to sit with an empty tray on my tray table for over an hour before they finally shifted it (lazy and inattentive)
- Moved out of space plus Y (with 'assigned' seat) in order to accommodate someone who had not paid/earned access to priority seat selaction
- been called Mate/Buddy countless times. I hate that,, Call me Aerorob, Mr Aerorob, Sir whatever you like but don't call me buddy....again it's lazy and overly casual. Fly any of the airlines mentioned above and you won't hear any of that nonsense - not even on Air Namibia/Air Zimbabwe or Cebu Pacific
- Had a very poor standard (read lazy and rude) of C Class meal/cabin service. Of course being called buddy didn't make me warm to them not did the business class amenity kit that was poor compared some I have had in Y. It's all about attention to detail.

Almost all of these issues are a non-entity/minor inconvenience in solitude, but are now building up and starting to come into my reasoning when purchasing as I think it is now systemic not isolated issues. The cuts they used to make were not obvious flight to flight, now they are.
Flown to 147 Airports in 62 Countries on 83 Operators and counting. Wanderlust is like Syphilis, once you have the itch it's too late for treatment.
 
Gasman
Posts: 2203
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 153

Fri Feb 06, 2015 5:05 am

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 41):
It will be the industry standard by the 777X.

The 77X will be slightly wider though, but still.

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 41):
No waterservice overnight on multiple flights and been forced to sit with an empty tray on my tray table for over an hour before they finally shifted it (lazy and inattentive)

Standard for NZ. On QF overnight the service continues unabated throughout the night.

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 41):
been called Mate/Buddy countless times. I hate that,, Call me Aerorob, Mr Aerorob, Sir whatever you like but don't call me buddy....again it's lazy and overly casual.

Totally with you here. This was a Fyfe legacy. Recycle bin on that one. Professionalism costs nothing, and I'm not sure why that had to be included with all the other cuts. It's as if interpersonal interactions have to match the hard product.

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 41):
Dreadful as it is - it's time to upgrade to another fare (which is probably the idea - make the passengers all miserable enough they feel they have to pay more in order just to be comfortable,).

I'm sure it *is* the idea, but on NZ you have to pay a lot more for Y+ which is a weird product in itself. I'm happy to pay more if I feel I'm getting value; but on NZ that's hard to find.

[Edited 2015-02-05 21:06:43]

[Edited 2015-02-05 21:07:14]
 
User avatar
NZ107
Posts: 4946
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 6:51 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 153

Fri Feb 06, 2015 5:09 am

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 41):
- ignored by FSM when they were doing "*Gold" cabin introductions

I've never been greeted as a *G.. Mind you, I've only been *G for a year. But I've travelled with a *G on NZ over the last few years and no greets there either. I might just be heading back to OW this year or next..

Quoting zkncj (Reply 37):

The viewing deck is closed off, and there is massive building work that you can see from the car park around that area. The new Lounge is meant to be on the floor above we're the current lounges are.

Right. Wasn't aware it was to be on the next level. I wonder what they'll do with the space where the current lounge is then. In that case, I suppose we'll just lose the skydeck bit, where I spent a lot of my childhood!
It's all about the destination AND the journey.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19473
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 153

Fri Feb 06, 2015 5:24 am

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 41):
been called Mate/Buddy countless times. I hate that,, Call me Aerorob, Mr Aerorob, Sir whatever you like but don't call me buddy....again it's lazy and overly casual.

Tell 'em.

Spark/Telecom had a habit of calling me "Dave" when I had introduced myself as "David." It took a while - several conversations with supervisors and finally a letter to the CEO - but they don't call me "Dave" anymore.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
Gasman
Posts: 2203
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 153

Fri Feb 06, 2015 5:35 am

Quoting mariner (Reply 44):
Spark/Telecom had a habit of calling me "Dave"

They've never called me "Dave"............ but then again my name isn't David.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19473
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 153

Fri Feb 06, 2015 6:00 am

Quoting gasman (Reply 45):
They've never called me "Dave"............ but then again my name isn't David.

But do they call you Mr.?

The use of first names and diminutives of first names (Dave or Davo) can be traced back to at least WW1, as a way of bonding together. Similarly, the use of familiars - "mate" - being the most obvious, and also the dislike of last names.

So Air NZ - or any service industry here - is caught between a rock and hard place, formality against cultural validity.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
Gasman
Posts: 2203
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 153

Fri Feb 06, 2015 6:29 am

Quoting mariner (Reply 46):
So Air NZ - or any service industry here - is caught between a rock and hard place, formality against cultural validity.

Indeed. But I think we're all agreed that "mate" (or Dave  ) is a massive own-goal in PR.

Personally, I like to be called "Sir" delivered with a smile that says "mate" - if that makes any sense at all. Intriguingly this has nothing to do with my own sense of self, but when I'm greeted correctly I have have more respect for the greeter.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19473
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 153

Fri Feb 06, 2015 6:37 am

Quoting gasman (Reply 47):
Indeed. But I think we're all agreed that "mate" (or Dave &nbsp  is a massive own-goal in PR.

I don't agree about mate and no f/a has ever called me Dave - at least not yet.

A very long time ago, after I had been in a war zone in Africa for two months, I finally boarded a Qantas plane to take me home, and the first class f/a greeted me with a cheery "G'day, mate - going home?"

After what I'd been through, it was the best greeting I've ever had on an aircraft. I think it is close to impossible to regulate, I think it depends on the people skills of the f/a (or whoever), but yes, the fall back is "sir."

mariner

[Edited 2015-02-05 22:39:12]
aeternum nauta
 
kiwiandrew

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 153

Fri Feb 06, 2015 7:54 am

I don't think the crew can win....personally, I hate being called "sir". I realise that there are a few people who like that sort of formality... but how are the crew supposed to know who wants to be addressed with British style formality and who wants normal kiwi levels of friendliness ?

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos